From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Louis Subject: Re: Joint statement on the GNU Project Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 06:26:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20191010042628.GZ20430@protected.rcdrun.com> References: <87ftk4hbhu.fsf@gnu.org> <87wodfi44x.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2xui9fr.fsf@igalia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y2xui9fr.fsf@igalia.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Andy Wingo Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Dimakakos Dimos , help-guix@gnu.org, GNU Guix maintainers List-Id: help-guix.gnu.org * Andy Wingo [2019-10-09 11:49]: > For what it is worth, I have some personal answers to some of these > questions here: >=20 > https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu I am appreciating that you are publishing your opinions beyond the GUIX.GNU.ORG and GNU.ORG domains. That is how it shall be done. > For many years now, I have not considered Richard Stallman (RMS) to > be the head of the GNU project. Yes, he created GNU, speaking it > into existence via prophetic narrative and via code; yes, he > inspired many people, myself included, to make the vision of a GNU > system into a reality; and yes, he should be recognized for these > things. But accomplishing difficult and important tasks for GNU in > the past does not grant RMS perpetual sovereignty over GNU in the > future. All of his works in past do grant him all of the rights to continue with it as he wish. And for the case that he is not any more around, he has formed the FSF. Everything clear. > More on the motivations for the non serviam in a minute. But first, > a meta-point: the GNU project does not exist, at least not in the > sense that many people think it does. It is not a legal entity. It > is not a charity. You cannot give money to the GNU project. Besides > the manifesto, GNU has no by-laws or constitution or founding > document. It does exist, and it need not exist in your own legal framework, and there is something known as freedom of associations, so GNU project never had to exist as registered entity. FSF came somewhat later. That does not invalidate GNU project. I am not sure from which country you are, but if you are saying that "project" or "organization" need to be legally registered then maybe you come from some limited or under developed country with fascist restrictions. Even if some project is not registered, one can give money to it, I don't know which jurisdiction you are speaking about. If one wish to remain tax-free on donations, one can register a non-profit in the USA but simple registration does not make it tax-free, one has to prove the tax-free status by doing application to the IRS. But that anybody in the world can receive donations that is a fact, and you cannot dispute it, you can tell it from your view point, but man I guess you are lacking some legal information. > One could describe GNU as a set of software packages that have been > designated by RMS as forming part, in some way, of GNU. But this > artifact-centered description does not capture movement: software > does not, by itself, change the world; it lacks agency. It is the > people that maintain, grow, adapt, and build the software that are > the heart of the GNU project -- the maintainers of and contributors > to the GNU packages. They are the GNU of whom I speak and of whom I > form a part. It is good if you express yourself as "GNU software supporters, programmers", something like that. Don't use GNU ot say "people", it is not quite adequate, try to express yourself as specifics as possible to avoid generalization. > Richard Stallman describes himself as the leader of the GNU project > -- the "chief GNUisance", he calls it -- but this position only > exists in any real sense by consent of the people that make GNU. So > what is he doing with this role? Does he deserve it? Should we > consent? He is policy maker, chief planner. Without him, you would not have the GPL, copyleft, free software freedoms, books and articles, speeches on free software. You maybe consider leader only if leader does what you think it is right to do. That is not how leadership works. > To me it has been clear for many years that to a first > approximation, the answer is that RMS does nothing for GNU. Then you are totally misinformed. If you think it is so, why not simply resign? > RMS does not write software. He does not design software, or > systems. He does hold a role of accepting new projects into GNU; > there, his primary criteria is not "does this make a better GNU > system"; it is, rather, "does the new project meet the minimum > requirements". That is lie, nonsense. Everybody is free to decide when to write software or to organize the community to write it. You lack basic senses of observation. GNU, FSF, and majority of free software, including Linux kernel are free because it was incentive and original creation of Richard Stallman. Linus would never make it free, he said so, and he did not publish it as free. Many software pieces became free because of Richard Stallman. If you cannot see his work, I would ask you to find other community to spread misinformation. > By itself, this seems to me to be a failure of leadership for a > software project like GNU. Absolutely not, but if you have serious disagreements, how about organizing your own project and forwarding free software? To cut the story short, none of your opinions are the fact that prove "that Stallman=E2=80=99s behavior over the years has undermined a core va= lue of the GNU project: the empowerment of all computer users. GNU is not fulfilling its mission when the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to." Do you have anything better? Jean I am asking those people who are pretending to represent all of the GNU project and who are defaming and slandering RMS[1] to step down and resign, do your software hacking somewhere else, you do not deserve funding that RMS is giving you. Ludovic Court=C3=A8s, Ricardo Wurmus, Matt Lee, Andreas Enge, Samuel Thibault, Carlos O'Donell, Andy Wingo, Jordi Guti=C3=A9rrez Hermoso, Mark Wielaard, Ian Lance Taylor, Werner Koch, Daiki Ueno, Christopher Lemmer Webber, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, John Wiegley, Tom Tromey, Jeff Law, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Joshua Gay, Ian Jackson, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice, Andrej Shadura, Zack Weinberg, John W. Eaton, RESIGN and step down from GNU projects, disassociate yourself, find another house for your excessive and uncrontollable fear of the free speech. Facts: https://geoff.greer.fm/2019/09/30/in-defense-of-richard-stallman/ https://sterling-archermedes.github.io/